Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.11627/jkise.2013.36.1.70

Determination of Priority for Improvement Using the Theory of Two-dimensional Quality  

Song, Hae Geun (Department of Systems Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering / v.36, no.1, 2013 , pp. 70-77 More about this Journal
Abstract
The theory of two-dimensional quality, in particular, the Kano model that is developed by the analogy with the M-H theory, has been applied in various industry fields for more than three decades. Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) assumes that the degree of physical fulfilment of quality attributes and the satisfaction of that attribute is linear, and therefore, it is applicable to the traditional one-dimensional attribute, not other quality types defined in the Kano's model such as attractive or must-be attribute. To solve this problem, the current study suggests a new importance-satisfaction analysis using a modified IPA in accordance with the three quality types and a diagonal method introduced by Slack (1999) to determine improvement priority. For this, I investigated 19 smartphone's quality attributes and conducted a survey of 334 university students for the results of Kano's model, which adopted from Song and Park (2012)'s study, and the importance/satisfaction of the quality attributes and the results of the priority for improvement of the 19 quality attributes. The results show that the proposed I-S priority model is better than the conventional IPA based on the comparison results of determination coefficient from the regression analysis of the two models.
Keywords
The Kano Model; Quality Improvement; Diagonal Model; Quality Attributes;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Nilsson-Witell, L. and Fundin, A., "Dynamics of service attributes : A test of Kano's theory of attractive quality. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 2005, Vol. 16, No. 2, p 152-168.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Herzberg, F., One more time-How do you motivate employees?. Harvard Business Review, 1987, Vol, 65, No. 5, p 109-120.
3 Herzberg, F., Mausner, B.M., and Snyderman, B.B., The motivation to work. John Wiley and Sons, NY, 1959.
4 Högström, C., The theory of attractive quality and experience offerings. The TQM Journal, 2011, Vol. 23, No. 2, p 111-127.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Jang, H.Y., Song, H.G., and Park, Y.T., Determining the importance values of quality attributes using ASC. Journal of Korean Society of Quality Management, 2012, Vol. 40, No. 4, p 589-598.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Kano, N., Life cycle and creation of attractive quality, Proceedings of the 4th QMOD Conference, Linkoping, Sweden, 2001, p 18-36.
7 Kano, N., Seraku, N., Takahashi, F., and Tsjui, S., Attractive quality and must-be quality. Hinshitsu, 1984, Vol. 14, No. 2, p 147-56.
8 Khalifa, A.S., Customer value : a review of recent literature and an integrative configuration. Management Decision, 2004, Vol. 42, No. 5, p 645-66.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Kim, T.O., Analysis of quality characteristics of smart phone using modified Kano model. Society of Korea industrial and systems engineering, 2012, Vol. 35, No. 4, p 57-65.
10 Kuo, Y.-F., Chen, J.-Y., and Deng, W.-J., IPA-Kano model : A new tool for categorising and diagnosing service quality attributes, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence. 2012, Vol. 23, No. 7/8, p 731-748.   DOI
11 Levitt, T., The Marketing Imagination. The Free Press, 1986, New York.
12 Lofgren, M. and Witell, L., Two decades of using Kano's theory of attractive quality : a literature review, Quality Management Journal, 2008, Vol. 15, No. 1, p 59-75, ASQ.
13 Matilla, J.A. and James, J.C., Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing, 1977, Vol. 41, p 77-79.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Matzler, K., Bailom, F., Hinterhuber, H., Renzl, B., and Pichler, J., The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction : a reconsideration of the importance-performance analysis. Industrial Marketing Management, 2004a, Vol. 33, No. 4, p 271-277.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Matzler, K., Fuchs, M., and Schubert, A.K, Employee satisfaction : does Kano's model apply?. Total Quality Management, 2004b, Vol. 15, No. 9-10, p 1179-1198.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Matzler, K., Hinterhuber, H.H., Bailom, F., and Sauerwein, E., How to delight your customer. Journal of Product and Brand Man-agement, 1996, Vol. 5, No. 2, p 6-18.
17 Mikulic, J. and Prebezac, D., A critical review of techniques for classifying quality attributes in the Kano model. Managing Service Quality, 2011, Vol. 21, No. 1, p 46-66.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Anderson, E.W. and Mittal, V., Strengthening the satisfaction-profit chain. Journal of Service Research, 2000, Vol. 3, No. 2, p 107-120.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 Bacon, D.R., A comparison of approaches to importanceperformance analysis. International Journal of Market Research, 2003, Vol. 45, No. 1, p 55-71.
20 Berger, C., Blauth, R., Boger, D., Bolster, C., Burchill, G., DuMouchel, W., Pouliot, F., Richter, R., Rubinoff, A., Shen, D., Timko, M., and Walden, D., Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality. Center for Quality of Management Journal, 1993, Vol. 2, No. 4, p 2-36.
21 Cadotte, E.R. and Turgeon, N., Dissatisfiers and Satisfiers : Suggestions from Consumer Complaints and Compliments. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and Complaining Behavior, 1988, Vol. 1, p 74-79.
22 Eskidsen, J.K. and Kristensen, K., Enhancing importance performance analysis, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 2006, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 40-60.   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Slack, N., The Importance-Performance Matrix as a Determinant of Improvement Priority. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 1994, Vol. 14, No. 5, p 59-75.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Oliver, R.L., Attribute Need Fulfillment in Product Usage Satisfaction. Psychology and Marketing, 1995, Vol. 12, No. 1, p 1-17.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Sampson, S.E. and Showalter, M.J., "The Performance-Importance Response Function : Observations and Implications. The Service Industries Journal, 1999, Vol. 19, No. 3, p 1-25.
26 Shahin, A., Integration of FMEA and the Kano model : An exploratory examination. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 2004, Vol. 21, No. 7, p 731-746.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Song, H.G. and Park, Y.T., Wordings of the Kano modelʼs questionnaire. Journal of Korean Society of Quality Management, 2012, Vol. 40, No. 4, p 453-466.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Swan, J.E. and Combs, L.J., Product Performance and Consumer Satisfaction : A New Concept. Journal of Marketing, 1976, Vol. 40, No. 2, p 25-33.
29 Tan, K.C. and T.A. Pawitra., Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano's model into QFD for service excellence development. Managing Service Quality, 2001, Vol. 11, No. 6, p 418-430.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Tontini, G. and Silveira, A., Identification of satisfaction attributes using competitive analysis of the improvement gap. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 2007, Vol. 27, No. 5, p 482-500.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Vargo, S.L., Nagao, K., He, Y., and Morgan. F.W., Satisfiers, Dissatisfiers, Criticals, and Neutrals : A Review of Their Relative Effects on Customer (Dis) Satisfaction. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2007, Vol. 11, No. 2, p 1-13.
32 Yang, C.-C., Establishment and applications of the integrated model of service quality measurement. Managing Service Quality, 2003, Vol. 13, No. 4, p 310-324.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Fong D., Using the self-stated importance questionnaire to interpret Kano questionnaire results. Center for Quality of Management Journal, 1996, Vol. 5, No. 3, p 21-23.